Free Website Hosting

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

OBJECTIVES RESOLUTION AND SECULARISM--Part I

By Wajahat Masood

The founder of Pakistan, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, wanted a separate country for Muslims but his political upbringing in a pluralist society prevented him from declaring Pakistan an Islamic state. Contrary to the general perception in India, Mr Jinnah was arguably a secular and liberal Muslim who wanted a Pakistan where all citizens would be equal in the eyes of the constitution irrespective of their religion, caste or creed. But leaders like Liaqat Ali Khan and power hungry opportunistic religious leaders wanted it to be otherwise. In this beautifully written series titled, "Objectives Resolution and Secularism", Mr Wajahat Masood delves deep into history to find out how Jinnah's dream of a secular and democratic Pakistan was shattered. -- Editor

A few days ago brother Asif Mahmood raised some questions. He does not raise questions, rather raises a storm. Of late no response has been received from the other side of the political dividing line. The irony is that from among the people on this side, the gentleman has targetted those 'babalog' who do not read Urdu in the first place. It was decided that though I am not the target, I should respond because the voice of conscience should be responded.

In his questions he had quoted half a dozen sections and asked if 'the self proclaimed broadminded' people were willing to accept the supremacy of those sections, considering them part and parcel of the Constitution of Pakistan. This humble writer has selected Section 2(a) from the slightly long list. The sub-section A of Section 2 of the Constitution of Pakistan is a gift of the dictatorship of General Ziaul Haque. He had declared the Objectives Resolution approved by the first Legislative Assembly of Pakistan on March 12, 1949 an important part of the Constitution by including the preface to the original constitution of 1973 in it.

So, dear gentleman, I regard the Constitution of 1973 as the sole guarantor of Pakistan's sovereignty. Therefore, I abide by everything written in the Constitution including Section 2(a). However, in the light of the established principles of democratic lawmaking, the Constitution of Pakistan is an amendable document which in itself contains the procedures of amendment. In principle I disagree with the Section 2(a) of the Constitution of Pakistan. My political belief is that whenever it is possible to amend the Constitution by two-third majority of Parliament, this undemocratic section introduced by the dictator, should be omitted.

Now the question is why I am opposed to the Section 2(a) of the Constitution. The answer is simple; I consider the Objectives Resolution contradictory to the democratic principles. The Objectives Resolution was presented in the Legislative Assembly by Prime Minister Liyaqat Ali Khan exactly six months after the death of the founder of Pakistan. It generated heated debate in the assembly for the next four days. The opposition leader from the East Pakistan Mr Chattopadhyay had vehemently opposed it. The draft of this Resolution was prepared by Liaqat Ali Khan and Shabbir Ahmad Usmani in the peaceful valley of Marri. No demands for such a Resolution had been made from the Legislature or sections of the people during the first 18 months of the Legislative Assembly. In contrast, the session of the Legislative Assembly held in March 1949 was called in relation with the annual budget. The Objectives Resolution was like the illusion of a pigeon conjured up by the magician to divert the people's attention from the beautiful bird called democracy.

It will not be irrelevant here to tell you that Shabbir Ahmad Usmani was a pesh imam living in ignominy in the Muslim-minority state of Hyderabad Deccan who was best known for his on-demand fatwas on inheritance-related disputes of the Muslim Zamindars. After the formation of Pakistan, he landed up in Pakistan and assumed the title of Shaikhul Islam. He had arrived in Paksitan in way back August 1947 whereas the sultanate of Mir Usman Ali in Hyderabad lasted till September 12, 1948. Apart from giving shape of an Islamic state to the Muslim majority country of Pakistan, his duties included solving the shariah related issues of the rulers of the states of Khairpur (Sindh), Bahawalpur (Punjab), Qalawat and Kharan (Balochistan). My religionist friends often remind me that the Flag of Pakistan was hoisted by Shabbir Ahmad Usmani. But they forget to point out that the first session of the Legislative Assembly of Pakistan in which Qaid-e-Azam Md Ali Jinnah was also present started without a recitation of the Quran.

The differences in points of view between Liaqat Ali Khan and Md Ali Jinnah over the future political shape of Pakistan are history now. Jinnah's destination was a modern democratic state whereas the political temperament of Liaqat Ali Khan was free from democratic shackles.

Before analysing and explaining the text of the Objectives Resolution, it is equally important to pay attention to the document which became a basis for the demand of Pakistan, the movement for Pakistan and the establishment of Pakistan, that is , the basic points of the resolution passed in the annual conference of the Muslim League in Lahore on March 24, 1940 were two. In the first point, the political issue of India was conditioned with such a geographical bandobast with the help of which the Muslim majority areas in the east and west of India could be carved out as separate states. In the second part of the resolution, 'appropriate, effective and binding' reservations were demanded for the religious minorities to come into existence as a result of these geographical alterations. It was understandable that these reservations were being demanded equally for the Muslims of the Hindu majority India and the non-Muslim citizens of the Muslim majority Pakistan. In the Lahore resolution the term 'Islamic state', 'shariah-based system' or 'Islamic system' was not even once mentioned.

In 1946, the elected Parliamentary representatives of Muslim League amended the resolution and replaced the word 'states' with 'state' but even in this final phase of the movement for Pakistan no need was felt to include the concepts like 'mullaism' or 'Islamic system' in the guiding principles of the Muslim League. Albeit, interestingly, addressing the Muslim League convention in Delhi on April 11,1946, Qaid-e-Azam said, "What are we fighting for? Theocracy is not our goal, nor do we want a theocratic state. No one denies the existence of faith, and faith is indeed close to our heart. But there are other things which are equally necessary, such as our social life and our economic life, and how are you going to safeguard your economic life without political power?" Here the Qaid-e-Azam was distinguishing between religion and politics. It is in the knowledge of all that fatwas of kufr (infidelity) issued against Qaide Azam were in reaction to his speech in Lucknow session of the Muslim League in 1938 in which he had advocated the participation of women in public life.

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Shahbaz Sharif – Reality Check


Humza Ikram

Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif’s statement to spare the Punjab from attacks since both Taliban and N -league has same agenda was condemnable . My question to Mr Sharif is if both N-league and Taliban has same agenda ;wheter the agenda of previous N.W.F.P government of MMA was any different then Taliban ??or he is trying to suggest that N-league is even more closer to Taliban ideology then MMA was OR he is saying MMA was not against NATO forces in Afghanistan and Nawaz League is .

Reality is MMA government was obstacle against generating public opinion against Taliban and many of their minister used to justify sucide attacks and had a reason to explain on barbaric sucide attack . My plea is taliban nevered listen to MMA and not spared Pakhtunhuwa from attacks and infact offcial record suggest there were record increase in sucide and other attacks during MMA regime in Puktunkhuwa from 2002-2007 .

Many observer beleive Shahabaz was addressing Punjabi trading class who are fearing minimal business activity in unstable security situation and thus don’t want military operation in upper part of the country against taliban and Sipah -i-Sahaba in punjab fearing retaliation from them in urban center that will adversely the business activity .

Punjabi urban trading class is a traditional vote bank for Sharif’s in punjab and sharif beleive further attacks will lead to embrassing situation for him among trading class of Punjab .

My question to sharif is wheter bussiness activity gained momentum in N.W.F.P during MMA regime since they also claimed to have similar agenda which taliban is fighting for ?? NO

Does Pukhtun are thankful to MMA for advocating taliban’s agenda ?? NO Shahbaz Sharif has to quickly decide wheter he wants to become hurdle against new found civilian ownership in favour state onslaught against militant and become part of history like MMA ?? decision has to be made by N league .

Saturday, March 27, 2010

General Zia Survives Constitutional Purge Thanks To Nawz Sharif

Nawaz Sharif has dropped a bombshell on the country’s expectations with his news conference yesterday. It was a most thoughtless and insensitive step by Pakistan’s “most popular” politician. His party had agreed to the method of judges’ appointment and it was said that he had agreed to the re-naming of Pakhtunkhwa as well. So this is a major surprise. One had hoped that as the leader from the biggest province and country’s ethnic majority, he would have been more mindful of his responsibility. Nawaz Sharif is protecting General Zia’s legacy when he should have taken a lead in undoing it and thereby atoning for his sins. In doing so, he would have also dealt a crushing blow to the number one issue around which Pushtun Nationalists have mobilized. But it was not to be. This is a rather bleak moment in our already patchy history.

PRESS GALLERY: Sharifs unveil ‘Punjab Card’ to prolong zero-sum game

By Saeed Minhas

ISLAMABAD: With the Sharifs unveiling their ‘Punjab Card’, Maulana Diesel trying to get even with the government, ‘Bhai logs’ of Karachi going into a pensive mood and nationalists getting a hint coupled with the success of the Kiyani-Qureshi-led strategic dialogues in the US, an under-siege government is likely to find more bumpy roads ahead.

Is it a credit-game or a zero-sum game? No matter how we look at it, Law Minister Barber Awan to some extent, and a non-elected party chief in the shape of Nawaz Sharif to quite a major extent, has played a Brutus by stalling the process that would have likely established the democratic institutions and weakened the forces of centralisation.

A nine-month long sojourn for parliamentary supremacy has ended in a zero-sum game, as PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif seems to have committed yet another political blunder by not only digressing from the Charter of Democracy and playing his ‘Punjab Card’, but also by siding with the forces of the status-quo and his political mentors on Thursday. If the smiles of Garrison-town-boy Chaudhry Nisar and the shyness of Mian Sahib was something to notice, then the movements of the power-sniffing ‘bhai logs’ and Maulanas’ were also worth noticing.

An unusual session of the National Assembly and then the Senate was called to get things moving away from a quasi-presidential system to a pretty much parliamentary system as envisaged by the forefathers of the 1973 constitution. All these hopes were given a jolt by none other than the man who very recently was claiming to have learned his lessons from history and was vowing to be willing to sacrifice his life to uphold democratic traditions.

What crossed his mind or what triggered this change of heart remained an omni-point of discussions amongst all parliamentarians.

Although, PPP legislators were all smiles knowing that the president would continue to hold on to his powers, but pretending to convey the message that “Mian Sahib is as ‘political’ as he was throughout the 80s and 90s”. Leaguers, however, avoided hitting the floor of the House or the corridors, knowing well that they won’t have any answers to the queries of inquisitive media corps.

Had it been the issue of not keeping him in the loop over the Pak-US strategic dialogue, then Mian Sahib should have mentioned it through his legally elected representatives in the Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms or throughout the past nine months, but he did not. As an analyst put it, Mian Sahib had a wishful thinking that the reforms committee would come to a deadlock and that he would then lead this stalemate to demand a mid-term elections assuming that he is at the zenith of his popularity. But after the unforced error committed by his younger brother Shahbaz Sharif and ultimate rebuke from the ‘Big Boss’, he seems to have realised that he is not in the good books of the Americans or the Khakis, therefore, the best way is to stall the process.

But as our senator-friend from the party of ‘Bhai logs’ raised the query that can a single party hijack the whole national agenda? He said that if so, he has opened a ‘Pandora’s box’ by giving an open invitation to all national and even linguistic parties to seek the division of Punjab into smaller units to end this monopoly game. He said that ‘Bhai logs’ had been wondering all along if the Sharifs had really changed and would let Asif Zardari of all people, take credit for amending the constitution.

If it was a case of appointment of judges, then his demand to include a retired judge in the judicial commission was acceded to the very next day by the reforms committee, then why is he still complaining, asked a political observer.

To put forward another of his lame excuses, Mian Sahib mentioned the differences with the Awami National Party over renaming NWFP. But when his kitchen-cabinet was asked about the same issue, they all sounded quite hopeful that after meeting with the ANP leaders, the issue would be resolved amicably. Why has Mian Sahib taken all this burden of proving that he belongs to the same old hands, which nurtured him in politis and then booted him out of it, remained on every legislators’ mind.

‘Barber Awan’, who has been on a tailor-made medical leave just like he was on leave when the restoration of judges issue surfaced, wanted to take credit by making a premature announcement about the 18th amendment. It was obvious that he was not considered very close to the presidential camp and was hoping that without even attending a majority of the 60 odd meetings of the reforms committee, he would take the credit by leaking the final outcome. Although it antagonised Raza Rabbani and many other members of the committee, but what dumbfounded them all was the faux pas of the Sharifs.

Courtesy Daily Times.

Friday, March 26, 2010

The Pope and the Pedophilia Scandal

Published: March 24, 2010

Pope Benedict XVI’s latest apology for the emerging global scandal of child abuse by predatory priests — an issue that the Roman Catholic Church should have engaged years ago — is strong on forgiveness but far short of the full accountability that Catholics need for repairing their damaged church.

With the scandal spreading across Europe, Benedict apologized to Irish Catholics last week for the “sinful and criminal” sexual abuse of thousands of children across decades. But he made no mention of the need to discipline diocesan leaders most responsible for shielding hundreds of priests from criminal penalties by moving them from parish to parish to continue their crimes.

The pope’s apology fell short not only for Catholics in Ireland, but for those in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, where hundreds of new allegations are emerging to be investigated by a Vatican office that has but 10 workers to do the job. Benedict’s promise of a special Vatican inquiry into the Irish scandal came across as too little, too late, considering it took two scathing investigations by the Irish government to prod the Vatican into action. One of these found church officials were able to convince Dublin police to join in their cover-up.

German Catholics are questioning Benedict’s role nearly 30 years ago when, as archbishop of Munich, he allowed the transfer of a priest molester. That priest had managed to remain at work until last week when he was suspended as the scandal grew with news media scrutiny. There are also questions about Benedict’s directive as a Vatican cardinal in 2001 that bishops worldwide were to keep pedophilia investigations secret under threat of ex-communication.

The Vatican insists this was to protect the innocent and never intended to encourage what has been established as a widespread failure by church officials to alert police to the criminal abuse of children. As pope, Benedict emphasized the duty to tell civil authorities, but church secrecy has been a hallmark defense by numerous dioceses that have fought in the courts against a full accounting to pedophilia victims.

It was hard to see how Vatican officials did not draw the lessons of the grueling scandal in the United States, where more than 700 priests were dismissed over a three-year period. But then we read Laurie Goodstein’s disturbing report in The Times on Thursday about how the pope, while he was still a cardinal, was personally warned about a priest who had molested as many as 200 deaf boys. But church leaders chose to protect the church instead of the children. The report illuminated the kind of behavior the church was willing to excuse to avoid scandal.

The American church’s investigative board of laity cautioned “there must be consequences” for prelates who orchestrated cover-ups. This has not been fulfilled, even though the board criticized management of rogue priests by Cardinals Roger Mahony of Los Angeles, the nation’s largest diocese, and Edward Egan, the former leader of the New York archdiocese. The pope’s expression of “shame and remorse” for the Irish scandal is not to be doubted. But what is most urgently needed was well described by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel — “truth and clarity about everything that took place.”

Friday, March 19, 2010

Profile: Nawaz Sharif

Nawaz Sharif was a participant or observer in the following events:

Hamid Gul, Nawaz Sharif, and Osama bin Laden conspire to assassinate Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Husein Haqqani, a Pakistani journalist who claims to have been involved in the plot, will later say that ISI Director Hamid Gul contacted Osama bin Laden, who was then known to provide financial support to Afghan mujaheddin, to pay for a coup/assassination of Bhutto. Gul also brings Nawaz Sharif, then the governor of Punjab province and a rival of Bhutto, into the plot. Bin Laden agrees to provide $10 million on the condition that Sharif transforms Pakistan into a strict Islamic state, which Sharif accepts. [Levy and Scott-Clark, 2007, pp. 193-194] Bhutto is not assassinated at this time, but bin Laden allegedly helps Sharif replace Bhutto one year later (see October 1990).

In October 1990, Nawaz Sharif is running for election to replace Benazir Bhutto as the prime minister of Pakistan. According to a senior Pakistani intelligence source, bin Laden passes a considerable amount of money to Sharif and his party, since Sharif promises to introduce a hard-line Islamic government. Bin Laden has been supporting Sharif for several years. There is said to be a photograph of Sharif chatting with bin Laden. Sharif wins the election and while he does not introduce a hard-line Islamic government, his rule is more amenable to bin Laden’s interests than Bhutto’s had been. Sharif will stay in power until 1993, then will take over from Bhutto again in 1996 and rule for three more years. [Reeve, 1999, pp. 170-171] Former ISI official Khalid Khawaja, a self-proclaimed close friend of bin Laden, will later claim that Sharif and bin Laden had a relationship going back to when they first met face to face in the late 1980s. [ABC News, 11/30/2007] There are also accounts of additional links between Sharif and bin Laden (see Spring 1989, Late 1996, and Between Late 1996 and Late 1998).

Pakistan’s army chief and the head of the ISI, its intelligence agency, propose to sell heroin to pay for the country’s covert operations, according to Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan’s prime minister at the time. Sharif claims that shortly after becoming prime minister, army chief of staff Gen. Aslam Beg and ISI director Gen. Asad Durrani present him with a plan to sell heroin through third parties to pay for covert operations that are no longer funded by the CIA, now that the Afghan war is over. Sharif claims he does not approve the plan. Sharif will make these accusations in 1994, one year after he lost an election and became leader of the opposition. Durrani and Beg will deny the allegations. Both will have retired from these jobs by the time the allegations are made. The Washington Post will comment in 1994, “It has been rumored for years that Pakistan’s military has been involved in the drug trade. Pakistan’s army, and particularly its intelligence agency… is immensely powerful and is known for pursuing its own agenda.” The Post will further note that in 1992, “A consultant hired by the CIA warned that drug corruption had permeated virtually all segments of Pakistani society and that drug kingpins were closely connected to the country’s key institutions of power, including the president and military intelligence agencies.” [Washington Post, 9/12/1994]

US agents uncover photographs showing Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) has ties with the Pakistani ISI. Several weeks after the World Trade Center bombing (see February 26, 1993), US agents come to Pakistan to search for Ramzi Yousef for his part in that bombing. Searching the house of Zahid Shaikh Mohammed, Yousef’s uncle, they find photographs of Zahid and KSM, who is also one of Yousef’s uncles, with close associates of Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. [Financial Times, 2/15/2003] According to another account, the pictures actually show Zahid with Sharif, and also with Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, president of Pakistan until his death in 1988. [Jacquard, 2002, pp. 66] Pictures of Osama bin Laden are also found. US agents are unable to catch Yousef because Pakistani agents tip him off prior to the US raids. Yousef is able to live a semi-public life (for instance, he attends weddings), despite worldwide publicity naming him as a major terrorist. The Financial Times will later note that Yousef, KSM, and their allies “must have felt confident that their ties to senior Pakistani Islamists, whose power had been cemented within the country’s intelligence service [the ISI], would prove invaluable.” [Financial Times, 2/15/2003] Several months later, Yousef and KSM unsuccessfully attempt to assassinate Benazir Bhutto, who is prime minister of Pakistan twice in the 1990s (see July 1993). She is an opponent of Sharif and the ISI. [Slate, 9/21/2001; Guardian, 3/3/2003] The Los Angeles Times will later report that KSM “spent most of the 1990s in Pakistan. Pakistani leadership through the 1990s sympathized with Osama bin Laden’s fundamentalist rhetoric. This sympathy allowed [him] to operate as he pleased in Pakistan.” [Los Angeles Times, 6/24/2002]

Ramzi Yousef and his uncle Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) unsuccessfully try to assassinate Behazir Bhutto, the leader of the opposition in Pakistan at the time. Yousef, with his friend Abdul Hakim Murad, plan to detonate a bomb near Bhutto’s home as she is leaving it. However, they are stopped by a police patrol. Yousef had hidden the bomb when the police approached, and after they left the bomb is accidentally set off, severely injuring him. [Ressa, 2003, pp. 25] KSM is in Pakistan at the time and will visit Yousef in the hospital, but his role in the bombing appears to be limited to funding it. [Ressa, 2003, pp. 25; Guardian, 3/3/2003] Bhutto had been prime minister in Pakistan before and will return to power later in 1993 until 1996. She will later claim, “As a moderate, progressive, democratically elected woman prime minister of Pakistan, I was a threat to the fundamentalist zealots on multiple levels…” She claims they had “the support of sympathetic elements within Pakistan’s security apparatus,” a reference to the ISI intelligence agency. [Slate, 9/21/2001] This same year, US agents uncover photographs showing KSM with close associates of previous Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Bhutto’s main political enemy at the time. Presumably, this failed assassination will later give KSM and Yousef some political connection and cover with the political factions opposed to Bhutto (see Spring 1993). Sharif will serve as prime minister again from 1997 to 1999. [Financial Times, 2/15/2003]

Not long after bin Laden moves back to Afghanistan (see After May 18, 1996-September 1996), he tries to influence an election in Pakistan. Benazir Bhutto, Prime Minister of Pakistan, is running for reelection against Nawaz Sharif, who had been prime minister earlier in the 1990s. (Bin Laden apparently helped Sharif win in 1990 (see October 1990).) “According to Pakistani and British intelligence sources, bin Laden traveled into Pakistan to renew old acquaintances within the ISI, and also allegedly met or talked with” Sharif. Sharif wins the election. Bhutto will later claim that bin Laden used a variety of means to ensure her defeat and undermine her. She will mention one instance where bin Laden allegedly gave $10 million to some of her opponents. Journalist Simon Reeve will later point out that while Bhutto claims could seem self-serving, “her claims are supported by other Pakistani and Western intelligence sources.” [Reeve, 1999, pp. 188-189] It will later be reported that double agent Ali Mohamed told the FBI in 1999 that bin Laden gave Sharif $1 million at some point while Sharif was prime minister (see Between Late 1996 and Late 1998). There are also reports that bin Laden helped Sharif become prime minister in 1990 (see October 1990). While Sharif will not support the radical Islamists as much as they had hoped, they will have less conflict with him that they did with Bhutto. For instance, she assisted in the arrest of Ramzi Yousef (see February 7, 1995), who had attempted to assassinate her (see July 1993).

According to FBI agent Jack Cloonan, in 1999, imprisoned double agent Ali Mohamed will tell Cloonan that he helped arrange a meeting between bin Laden and representatives of Nawaz Sharif, who is prime minister of Pakistan from 1990 through 1993 and again from 1996 to 1999. Mohamed claims that after the meeting he delivered $1 million to Sharif’s representatives as a tribute to Sharif for “not cracking down on the Taliban as it flourished in Afghanistan and influenced the Northwest Frontier Province in Pakistan.” It is unknown when this took place, but it is likely between late 1996, when the Taliban gain control over much of Afghanistan and Sharif as prime minister would have been in a position to crack down against them or not, and late 1998, when Mohamed is arrested in the US (see September 10, 1998). Cloonan will later say that he believes the information from Mohamed is accurate. [ABC News, 11/30/2007] There have been other allegations that Sharif met bin Laden in 1996 and used his help to win the election for prime minister (see Late 1996), and also allegations that bin Laden helped Sharif win the election for prime minister in 1990 (see Late 1996).

May 28, 1998: Pakistan Tests Nuclear Bomb

Edit event

Pakistan’s first nuclear  test take place underground but shakes  the mountains above it.Pakistan’s first nuclear test take place underground but shakes the mountains above it. [Source: Associated Press]Pakistan conducts a successful nuclear test. Former Clinton administration official Karl Inderfurth later notes that concerns about an Indian-Pakistani conflict, or even nuclear confrontation, compete with efforts to press Pakistan on terrorism. [US Congress, 7/24/2003] Pakistan actually built its first nuclear weapon in 1987 but kept it a secret and did not test it until this time for political reasons (see 1987). In announcing the tests, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif declares, “Today, we have settled the score.” [New York Times, 5/4/2003]

Nawaz Sharif meeting with US Defense Secretary William Cohen at  the Pentagon on December 3, 1998.Nawaz Sharif meeting with US Defense Secretary William Cohen at the Pentagon on December 3, 1998. [Source: US Department of Defense]Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif comes to Washington to meet with President Clinton and other top Clinton administration officials. The number one issue for Clinton is Pakistan’s nuclear program, since Pakistan had recently illegally developed and exploded a nuclear weapon (see May 28, 1998). The second most important issue is Pakistan’s economy; the US wants Pakistan to support free trade agreements. The third most important issue is terrorism and Pakistan’s support for bin Laden. Author Steve Coll will later note, “When Clinton himself met with Pakistani leaders, his agenda list always had several items, and bin Laden never was at the top. Afghanistan’s war fell even further down.” Sharif proposes to Clinton that the CIA train a secret Pakistani commando team to capture bin Laden. The US and Pakistan go ahead with this plan, even though most US officials involved in the decision believe it has almost no chance for success. They figure there is also little risk or cost involved, and it can help build ties between American and Pakistani intelligence. The plan will later come to nothing (see October 1999). [Coll, 2004, pp. 441-444]

Nawaz SharifNawaz Sharif [Source: Publicity photo]In early May 1999, the Pakistani army, at the instigation of Gen. Pervez Musharraf, seizes a strategic height called Kargil in the Indian province of Kashmir. This creates a grave crisis between Pakistan in India. By early July, the CIA picks up intelligence that Pakistan is preparing to launch nuclear missiles against India if necessary. Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif comes to the US on July 4 to meet with President Clinton about this. Clinton is livid and yells at Sharif for breaking promises, not only about Kashmir but also about failing to help with bin Laden. According to notes taken at the meeting, Clinton says he had “asked repeatedly for Pakistani help to bring Osama bin Laden to justice… [Sharif] promised often to do so but had done nothing. Instead, the ISI worked with bin Laden and the Taliban to foment terrorists.” Clinton threatens to release a statement calling worldwide attention to Pakistan’s support for terrorists. He adds, “You’ve put me in the middle today, set the US up to fail, and I won’t let it happen. Pakistani is messing with nuclear war.” Sharif backs down and immediately withdraws his troops from Kargil, ending the crisis. But as a result, Sharif becomes deeply unpopular in Pakistan. A few months later he will be ousted in a coup by Musharraf (see October 12, 1999), the general who started the crisis in the first place. [Coll, 2004, pp. 476-478]

The CIA readies an operation to capture or kill bin Laden, secretly training and equipping approximately 60 commandos from the Pakistani ISI. Pakistan supposedly agrees to this plan in return for the lifting of economic sanctions and more economic aid. [Washington Post, 10/3/2001] Pakistan proposed the plan in December 1998 (see December 2, 1998). US officials were said to be “deeply cynical” of the plan, knowing that Pakistani intelligence was allied with bin Laden (see Autumn 1998). They figured that if Pakistan really wanted bin Laden captured or killed, they could just tell the US when and where he would be, but Pakistan never revealed this kind of information. But the US went ahead with the plan anyway, figuring it held little risk and could help develop intelligence ties with Pakistan. [Coll, 2004, pp. 442-444] After months of training, the commando team is almost ready to go by this month. However, the plan is aborted because on October 12, General Musharraf takes control of Pakistan in a coup (see October 12, 1999). Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif ties to use the commando team to protect himself during the coup, but the team dissolves rather than fight on what they judge to be the losing side. Musharraf refuses to reform the team or continue any such operation against bin Laden despite the promise of substantial rewards. [Washington Post, 10/3/2001; Coll, 2004, pp. 442-444, 478-480] Some US officials later say the CIA was tricked, that the ISI just feigned to cooperate as a stalling tactic, and never intended to get bin Laden. [New York Times, 10/29/2001]

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. [Source: Government of Pakistan]Gen. Pervez Musharraf becomes leader of Pakistan in a coup, ousting Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. One major reason for the coup is the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency) felt Sharif had to go “out of fear that he might buckle to American pressure and reverse Pakistan’s policy [of supporting] the Taliban.” [New York Times, 12/8/2001] Shortly thereafter, Musharraf replaces the leader of the ISI, Brig Imtiaz, because of his close ties to the previous leader. Imtiaz is arrested and convicted of “having assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.” It is later revealed that he was keeping tens of millions of dollars earned from heroin smuggling in a Deutsche Bank account. [Financial Times, 8/10/2001] Lieutenant General Mahmood Ahmed, a close ally of Musharraf, is instrumental in the success of the coup. Ahmed actually secured the capital and detained Sharif, but then honored the chain of command and stepped aside so Musharraf, as head of the military, could take over. Ahmed is rewarded by being made the new director of the ISI. [Guardian, 10/9/2001; Coll, 2004, pp. 504-505]

Former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif attempts to return to Pakistan, but his return is thwarted by the Pakistani authorities and he is deported to Saudi Arabia. Sharif, ousted by General Pervez Musharraf in 1999 (see October 12, 1999), had been in exile for seven years due to corruption charges. After landing in Pakistan, Sharif, the leader of the political party Pakistan Muslim League-N, is briefly taken into custody and then put on a flight to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The deportation is a major political event in Pakistan and is marked by clashes between police and Sharif’s supporters. [CNN, 9/10/2007] However, Pakistan’s ISI agency will later broker a deal with Saudi authorities regarding Sharif (see November 20-23, 2007), enabling him to return (see November 25, 2007).

On October 4, 2007, after secret talks with former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in London and Dubai, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf issues an amnesty from prosecution for Bhutto and other exiled politicians. Bhutto and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif have been living in exile as both had been facing corruption charges in Pakistan. Both are now free to return. As part of a deal, Bhutto agreed that the members of the main opposition political party she leads, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) will abstain from voting when Musharraf runs for a second term as president two days later (in Pakistan, the president is chosen in a parliamentary vote). This ensures Musharraf’s victory (see October 6, 2007). Bhutto will return to Pakistan on October 18. [Rashid, 2008, pp. 386-387]

Following the failed return of former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan (see September 10, 2007), officials from Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency meet secretly with Saudi representatives in Riyadh to plan another attempt at bringing him back to the country ahead of forthcoming elections. (It is possible that ISI Director General Nadeem Taj and retired brigadier Niaz Ahmed also meet Sharif in Jeddah). The effort is apparently successful, as Sharif re-enters Pakistan a short time later (see November 25, 2007). Washington Post commentator Bob Novak will say these meetings indicate that if the turmoil in Pakistan causes current President Pervez Musharraf to lose his position, Sharif is “the ISI’s chosen successor.” [Daily Times (Lahore), 11/25/2007; Washington Post, 12/3/2007]

Nawaz Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-N political party and a former prime minister who had spent seven years abroad due to corruption charges, returns to Pakistan and is welcomed by supporters ahead of planned elections. He had made a failed attempt to return two months earlier (see September 10, 2007), but subsequently obtained the support of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency, smoothing his path (see November 20-23, 2007). [International Herald Tribune, 11/25/2007] He returns in the middle of a state of emergency declared by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf (see November 3-December 15, 2007).

Pakistan holds parliamentary elections, and opposition parties are the overwhelming winners. President Pervez Musharraf does not lose his presidency, as he was reelected by the National Assembly several months earlier (see October 6, 2007). However, his party, Pakistan Muslim League-Q (PML-Q), loses control of the National Assembly, enabling the opposition parties to select their own prime minister a short time later. Much power will now shift to the position of prime minister, which had been completely overshadowed by Musharraf and his presidency since he took power in a coup in 1999 (see October 12, 1999). The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) wins 120 seats. The PPP was led by Benazir Bhutto until her recent assassination, and is now led by her husband, Asif Ali Zardari. The Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N), the party led by former primer minister Nawaz Sharif, gets 90. Musharraf’s PML-Q only wins 51 seats. Surprisingly, the Islamic parties are almost completely wiped out. The alliance of Islamic parties, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), did well and won two provincial elections in the last election in 2002, but this time it only wins six seats. A secular and moderate party, the Awami National Party, wins in the North-West Frontier Province, taking control from the MMA and forming the new provincial government there. No single party holds a majority, but the PPP immediately announces a coalition with Sharif’s PML-N party, shutting Musharraf’s PML-Q party out. Musharraf once had 80 percent popularity ratings in polls, but after many recent controversial moves, including declaring a state of emergency for over a month to stay in power (see November 3-December 15, 2007), his popularity rating is down to about 20 percent. [Rashid, 2008, pp. 390-391] One month later, the coalition selects a relatively unknown figure, Yousaf Raza Gillani, to be the new prime minister (see March 22-25, 2008).

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia hosts “ice-breaking” talks between the Afghan government, current and “former” Taliban, and representatives of other militant groups. Among the participants are Mullah Omar’s former “foreign minister” and his former Kandahar spokesman, Afghan government officials, and a representative of former mujaheddin commander Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, whose group, Hezb-i-Islami, is labeled a “terrorist organization” by the United States. [CNN, 10/5/2008] Hamid Karzai’s brother, Abdul Qayum, and ex-Pakistani premier Nawaz Sharif are also reported to be in the meetings. [Independent, 10/8/2008; Independent, 11/13/2008] During the talks, all parties reportedly agree that continued dialogue should be sought. AFP, citing Saudi sources, reports that the negotiators move on to Islamabad, Pakistan on Sunday, September 27, 2008. A spokesman for President Hamid Karzai will later deny that negotiations were held, saying that Afghan religious scholars had visited Saudi Arabia during Ramadan and attended a dinner with King Abdullah. A spokesman for the Taliban, Zabihullah Mujahed, also denies any meetings. [Agence France-Presse, 10/7/2008]

Entity Tags: Taliban, Hamid Karzai, Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, Afghan Government, Abdul Qayum Karzai, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Nawaz Sharif

Timeline Tags: War in Afghanistan

Of moneyed Hindus, Nawab sahib’s deadly post master & next finance minister


Wednesday, March 17, 2010
By By Mohammad Malick
ISLAMABAD: On Monday, Shahbaz Sharif’s arguably controversial remarks pertaining to the Taliban sparing Punjab provided fodder for animated discussion in the House. On Tuesday, the parliamentary anger mills were fed by another Sharif. This time, no less than the honourable Chief Justice of Lahore High Court, Khwaja Mohammad Sharif.

His remark about “Hindus” giving money and the Muslim militants using it to carry out terrorist activities while hearing a case made the Hindu and other minority parliamentarians cry out an anguished Hi Bhagwan and led to what must be the first ever parliamentary boycott of a sitting chief justice of a high court.

We have seen a lot of strange things happen in our exceptionally colourful chequered political history but never before a walkout of such a nature. In a desperate bid to do some instant damage control, a rather unconvincing Syed Khurshid Shah wanted the House to believe that the honourable CJ must have meant to say “Hindustan and not just Hindu”, adding: “It was apparently a slip of tongue.” But Ramesh Laal wasn’t buying and making a speech before his protest walkout said that the honourable chief justice should have talked about a country but not about a religion. On hearing this one of the chaps sitting in the press gallery quipped: “If nothing else, a judge must be able to judge his own words.”

A tad harsh assessment but not altogether without merit. It wasn’t as if Muslim MNAs weren’t in a supporting mood for their minority colleagues. Rasheed Akbar Niwani of the PML-N wanted the judges to “speak through judgements and not otherwise”, while Munawar Talpur apologised to the Hindu MNAs whom he described as “as good a Pakistani as anyone else”.

It is inconceivable that the honourable chief justice would deliberately want to hurt the feelings of the hundreds of thousands of Hindu Pakistanis but still, exceptional care must be exhibited by men of stature, particularly those whose word is literally the law, to avoid strengthening any negative stereotyping of religious and ethnic minority groups in particular.

We already have enough impure divisive fissures in our so called land of the pure, and the last thing we need is further alienation of the population that is already being treated as aliens most of the time.

Talking of aliens, there was also talk about the real aliens in our midst. You know the type? The one which believes that they landed here from Mars to rule us and profit from our miseries. Yep, I am talking about our bountiful bureaucrats.

Humayun Saifullah wanted the government to take notice of the report of The News revealing the details of the unlawful arbitrary ‘discretionary’ granting of contracts worth almost 100 billion rupees by the National Highway Authority.

In an understandably irritated tone, he informed the House-not that anyone was listening and even the prime minister was busy signing away a zillion applications of MNAs making a bee line to his seat- of the deliberate delays in allowing a vital amendment to be made to the powers of the Public Procurement Rules Authority.

He disclosed that the House committee dealing with the matter had recommended that the PPRA’s power to grant exemption to rules must be withdrawn. And would you believe when this simple recommendation was made? More than six months back but trust the baboos to ensure that it does not get enacted.

In a man’s world, discretion thy name is valour but in that of a bureaucrat: discretion thy name is wealth (and lots of it).

But the most amazing part of the whole episode was that near the end of his short lament, Humayun Saifullah literally shouted: “Is anyone listening? Will anyone in the government answer me?” and not a single minister or a treasury member even bothered feigning attentiveness, let alone offer any response.

Humayun had a point as he looked towards the prime minister since all authorities are controlled by the cabinet division which in turn is under the direct supervision of the prime minister.

But the PM was simply too busy signing away. Tragically warped priorities, is all one can say. Talking of confusions and tragedies, it wasn’t as if the House didn’t have its funny moments. So what if they bordered on the edge of being ludicrous.

How about a real aging Nawab eating his heart over an insolent post master of a little town? Funny nah? Because that is exactly what happened today. I am personally very fond of Nawab Yousaf Talpur. He is a good man, like they say but apparently things have started to slip a bit I’m afraid.

The old Nawab stood there a whole good fifteen minutes or so venting his ire against the post master of Umar Kot. Yeah, you read it right, the post master of Umar Kot.

Nawab sahib, though he didn’t say as such, clearly wanted him to be tied to the back of a chariot and dragged through the dusty streets of Umar Kot for daring to “damage” the reputation of the mighty government both by misappropriating moneys being sent under the Benazir Income Support Fund and also “returning” money orders intended for the needy.

What he would gain by returning, Nawab sahib didn’t elaborate. But imagine one puny post master threatening the survival of the majestic PPP government. This man must be seen and in case my column goes missing over the next couple of days you should know that I shall be in Umar Kot to meet the deadly post master.

FOOTNOTE: In the coming days I shall bare the explosive details of a multi-billion dollar scam against Pakistan but let me share just one thing in advance that it happened on the watch of one man who is being seriously considered to watch over the national kitty as the country’s next finance minister. So keep your fingers closed and pray hard.